Integrated River Basin Management – Ecosystem Function-Based
Approach and Application
Takehiro NAKAMURA
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)1
Abstract
Integrated River Basin Management is intended to manage the various relevant factors in the
basins in order to achieve multiple objectives for human resource use and protection of the aquatic
environment. It is also an approach, which essentially takes a cross-sectoral and interdisciplinary
approach to achieve institutional co-ordination and co-operation. UNEP’s approach has expanded the
scope of such integrated river basin management to include also affected coastal areas to form the
Integrated Coastal Area and River Basin Management (ICARM). Functioning of ecosystems within
river basins can provide many benefits for human life. However, benefits that an ecosystem can
provide were not appropriately recognised within one system, and therefore, development activities
were conducted without compensating benefits that were lost due to them. In order to help mitigate
conflicts over the resources, it is crucial to identify and appropriately recognise ecosystem functions,
such as flood mitigation, water supply, groundwater recharge, agricultural production, fisheries,
tourism, etc., so that these ecosystem functions can be taken into account in the river basin
management. Triggered by the 1998/1999 floods in the Yangtze River Basin in the People’s Republic
of China, the concept of the Ecosystem Function Conservation Areas has been introduced to take an
ecosystem function based approach to river basin management.
I.
Introduction
Based on the concept of ‘sustainable development’, aiming at balancing the
traditionally conflicting elements, namely, natural resources exploitation, social
development and protection of the environment, inland water resources management
is to achieve maximum benefits of human and ecosystems by balancing water
resources exploitation, economic development of basins, and protection of aquatic
environment, through institutional arrangements for co-operation and co-ordination
among the water, environment, health, agriculture, industry and other relevant sectors
at various levels.
Conventionally, efforts were made for control and management of resources
targeting water bodies themselves, such as structural flood control measures, and
reducing direct discharge of industrial pollution. However, it has been recognised that
land-based human activities and natural events in the hydrological, geochemical and
ecological cycle within basins influence availability and quality of inland water
resources. In this way, basin management for the ultimate purpose of controlling
quality, availability of and demand for inland water resources addresses natural and
human activities within target basins. However, unfortunately, the fact that, within
one basin, various factors, including hydrological, geochemical, biological or socioeconomic (and even political and cultural) factors, constitute a complicated system of
interlinkages relevant to water quality and quantity, makes the basin management
difficult to design. To make the situation more complicated, water managers usually
set multiple objectives for use of the available and limited freshwater resources. At
the same time, different management objectives by various sectors in many cases
1
P.O. Box 30552, Nairobi, Kenya. Tel. +254-2-623886; Fax: +254-2-624249; E-mail:
Takehiro.Nakamura@unep.org
The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of the United Nations Environment
Programme.
1
conflict each other, and there needs an institutional co-ordination mechanism to
effectively achieve these objectives.
An integrated basin management is intended to manage these factors in the
basins in order to achieve multiple objectives for human resource use and protection
of the aquatic environment. It is also an approach, which essentially takes a crosssectoral and interdisciplinary approach to achieve institutional co-ordination and cooperation.
II.
UNEP’s programme – Integrated Coastal Area and River Basin
Management (ICARM)
In order to promote the concept of the Integrated River Basin Management
and to present programmatic and strategic approaches, UNEP launched in 1986 a
freshwater programme, known as the Environmentally Sound Management of Inland
Waters (EMINWA) programme. This programme is designed to assist governments
to integrate environmental consideration into management and development of inland
water resources, with a view to reconciling conflicting interests and ensuring the
regional development of water resources in harmony with the water-related (natural
and artificial) environment throughout entire water systems (David et al., 1988).
The EMINWA, in this way, extended its programmatic scope to address multisectoral and integrated approach, evolving from the traditional sectoral management
of target resources or for simply achieving economic goals. Through this process, it
has recognised a need for an approach to manage both river basins and coastal areas
in an integrated manner, on the basis not only of their hydrological and geochemical
relationship but also of needs for a more effective socio-economic development of the
two management units, which were conventionally managed separately. Coinciding
with this development, UNEP’s Regional Seas Programme also shared such a need
since coastal management is required to address land-based activities within the river
basins connected to the target coastal areas.
Based on the hydrologic and geochemical relationship between the coastal
areas and river basins, and from the perspective of optimal and sustainable economic
development, a concept of the Integrated Coastal Area and River Basin Management
(ICARM) has been formulated, and UNEP and Priority Actions Programme Activity
Centre (PAP/RAC) of the Mediterranean Action Plan have jointly prepared the
“Conceptual Framework and Planning Guidelines for Integrated Coastal Area and
River Basin Management” (UNEP/MAP/PAP, 1999). These guidelines include
proposed conceptual planning process for ICARM, and promote, among others,
participation of different levels of stakeholders in this process and use of strategic
economic and environmental impact assessment. UNEP has been or is planning to
apply such an ICARM approach to a set of demonstration sites (the Cetina River basin
and its associated coastal areas between Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina; the
Senegal River basin and its associated coastal areas; Incomati River basin and its
associated coastal areas among South Africa, Swaziland and Mozambique; and four
demonstration sites in Southeast Asia).
2
III.
Ecosystem-Function Based Approach under Integrated River Basin
Management
The ecosystem functions are generally categorised as functions for human
benefits (flood control, water quality control, etc.), ability to produce products that are
of economic value (agriculture, fishery, etc.), and ecosystem attributes (cultural
heritage and biodiversity value, etc.). The ecosystem functions and their values
depend on interacting elements within the ecosystem, such as water, soil, atmosphere
and vegetation, through hydrological, geochemical and biophysical processes.
Therefore, it is crucial to consider various functions together within one system, so
that its integrity can be maintained.
The ecosystems included in a river basin can have many types of functions,
uses and attributes that can provide valuable contribution to quality and availability of
water resources for human life and socio-economic development. Different
ecosystem functions are associated with the river basin, which are considered to be of
value to human life. To illustrate the range of ecosystem functions, typical functions
associated with wetlands that can be found in Asia and the Pacific are shown in Table
1 below.
Table 1 Ecosystem Functions in Wetlands: Examples from Asia and the Pacific
(modified from UNEP/Wetlands International, 1997)
Wetland Ecosystem Function
Flood Control (floodwater storage,
flood peak reduction, flood
desynchronisation)
Water Supply
Direct abstraction
Maintenance of river flow
Ground recharge
Prevention of saline water intrusion
Water Quality Maintenance and
Purification
Removal of agricultural pollutants
Treatment of mine drainage
Domestic and industrial waste water
treatment
Coastal Storm Protection and Erosion
Prevention
Reduction of net Green House Gas
emission
Transport
Recreation and Eco-tourism
Forest resources (timber, fuelwood,
tannin etc.)
Wildlife resources (meat, furs, skins,
Examples from Asia and the Pacific
Agusan Marsh, Philippines
Tamiraparani River Floodplain, Tamil Nadu, India
Ganges floodplain, India and Bangladesh
Marshes of Khao Sam Roi National Park, Thailand
Chaohu Lake, Anhui Province, China
Artificial wetlands, Baiyan coal mine, Sichuan,
China
East Calcutta Wetlands, India
Mangroves adjacent to Brisbane, Australia
Ogan-Komering lebaks, South Sumatra
Olango Island, Philippines
Sundarbans, India and Bangladesh
Mangroves of Malaysia, India and Bangladesh
3
etc.)
Fisheries
Plant Resources (food, medicine,
fodder, etc.)
Agricultural Resources
Maintenance of Biodiversity
Cultural and Heritage Significance
Danau Sentarum complex, Kapuas River,
Kalimantan, Indonesia
Mangroves of Southeast Asia
Freshwater beels and hoars of Bangladesh
Sundarbans, India and Bangladesh
Lake Lanao, Philippines
These values may or may not be evaluated in a monetary term. For example,
groundwater recharge functions and prevention of saltwater intrusion are vital to
freshwater resource users, and economic valuation of such a function would require
valuation of groundwater resources for all users, and therefore, would be difficult to
conduct.
In some of the systems, selected ecosystem functions may be emphasised,
often by readily-estimated economic values, leading possibly to destruction of
integrity of the ecosystem and negligence of other ecosystem functions. Small
ecosystems normally are modified for development activities to achieve single
economic benefits. However, detailed evaluation sometimes finds valuable
ecosystem functions that such a small ecosystem can provide for communities,
particularly rural settlements.
In order to maintain an ecosystem integrity and to achieve wise and maximum
use of a range of ecosystem functions, it is proposed that a set of and multiple
objections for ecosystem management be established, following the framework of the
Integrated Coastal Area and River Basin Management (ICARM). In this process,
trade-offs between various ecosystem functions and between the ecosystem functions
and ICARM priorities should be carried out (Figure 1) (modified from Ritchie and
James, 1997). Through this process, efforts should be made to maximise values and
functions of ecosystems included in the target river basin under specific management
objectives, so that a total environmental resilience of the basin can be enhanced.
For this purpose, the following procedure is proposed:







Classification and inventory of different ecosystems;
Identification and assessment of ecosystem functions;
Quantification and economic valuation of ecosystem functions;
Official recognition of ecosystem functions;
Trade-offs between the ecosystem functions identified and between the ecosystem
functions and the ICARM priorities;
Increased awareness of the ecosystem functions; and
Setting management objectives for wise and maximum use of ecosystem
functions, identified and recognised.
Under such an integrated approach, the issue is how to assess and evaluate
values of aquatic resources and environment, which are differently recognised by
varying levels of stakeholders, in order to set multiple management goals to utilise the
values of the resources and environmental functions for maximising their benefits for
4
human life and development. Such values can be created by functions of various
ecosystems, and it is, therefore, proposed to set a management goal and objective of
maintenance of, and wise and maximum use of ecosystem functions, for the purpose
of mitigating conflicts over specific resources in the ecosystem. This ecosystem
function-based approach requires recognition and endorsement of the ecosystem
functions among stakeholders at differing levels, thus necessitating participation of a
wide range of stakeholders.
IV.
Application of the Ecosystem Function Based River Basin Management to
the Yangtze River Basin in the People’s Republic of China
Yangtze River is the largest river in China, with its watershed being
approximately 1.8 million km2. Within the Yangtze River basin, about 85% are plateaus,
mountains and hilly areas, 11% plain and 4% rivers and lakes. There were many lakes in
the mid and lower reaches, with large ones being Dongting, Poyang, Tai and Hong
Lakes, and Jianghan Lake Group. The total water resources in the Yangtze River are
estimated at 961.6 billion m3, and the average annual discharge is 960 billion m3. The
Yangtze River Basin has a population of 411 million, and the population density
amounts to 220 persons/km2.
Triggered by the floods in the Yangtze Basin in 1998, UNEP initiated assistance
to the Government of the People’s Republic of China. The 1998 floods were caused by
intensive and long rainfall, and were characterised by many peaks and quick peak
arrival. The UNEP scoping mission carried out in January 1999 concluded that the
following factors and decreased ecosystem functions potentially contributed to the
unusually close crests and the prolonged high water level period (UNEP, 1999):
(1)
Deforestation and vegetation destruction which reduced watershed's water
holding capacity, and led to increased and quick storm runoff;
(2)
Deforestation and cultivation on steep mountains/hills and slope lands which
led to serious soil erosion, which filled up reservoirs, lakes, and elevated attribute
riverbeds, and reduced their water storage capacity; and
(3)
Conversion of lakes and associated wetlands into agricultural use reduced flood
water storage capacity.
As reported in the UNEP mission report, the identified potential underlying
causes of floods are relevant to various ecosystem functions within the river basin.
Different degrees of socio-economic development from one place to another in the
basin would indicate various impacts on functioning of ecosystem functions and thus
to vulnerability to the floods.
In order to address degraded ecosystem functions related to flood frequency
and magnitude, the Government of the People’s Republic of China has introduced the
concept of the “Ecosystem Functions Conservation Areas (EFCAs)”. A new
regulation aims at introducing EFCAs to maintain a sound ecological balance in areas
essential to ensuring environmental safety, and for alleviating and preventing natural
disaster. More specifically EFCAs are to be established in the following areas:
important headwater areas, natural areas essential for flood control, important water
conservation areas, important soil erosion conservation areas, important areas to
prevent disaster caused by hurricanes, and important coastal ecological systems. In
5
essence, EFCAs are areas where key ecosystem functions should be conserved to
achieve benefits of people.
UNEP is initiating to assist the Government of the People’s Republic of China
in establishing such Ecosystem Function Conservation Areas from the perspectives of
flood control. However, incorporating other ecosystem functions that are relevant to
such other aspects of water resources management as water quality maintenance into a
river basin management scheme, this ecosystem function-based approach can address
integrity of the ecosystems of the river basin and achievements of river basin
objectives with maximum efficiency and without unnecessary conflicts among
stakeholders.
References
UNEP/Wetlands International. 1997. Wetlands and Integrated River Basin
Management – Experiences in Asia and the Pacific. UNEP and Wetlands
International
UNEP. 1999. Report of Scoping Mission on 1998 Flood in the Yangtze River Basin,
China. UNEP, Nairobi.
UNEP/MAP/PAP. 1999. Conceptual Framework and Planning Guidelines for
Integrated Coastal Area and River Basin Management. UNEP and Priority Actions
Programme Regional Activity Centre (PAP/RAC) of the Mediterranean Action Plan
(MAP)
Ritchie, K.A. and R.F. James. 1997. Optimising Use of Wetland Benefits in River
Basin Management: A Case Study from the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia. In
Wetlands and Integrated River Basin Management – Experiences from Asia and the
Pacific, UNEP and Wetlands International
6
Requirements for Integrated
Coastal Area and River Basin
Management (ICARM) and
socio-economic
development
Ecosystem functions
 function
 use, or
 attribute
Impacts of human
development activities on
Ecosystem functions
 positive
 neutral, or
 negative
Other ecosystem function
values
 positive
 neutral, or
 negative
Other development values
 positive
 neutral, or
 negative
Figure 1. Trade-offs between ecosystem functions and between ecosystem
functions and management and development objectives of the Integrated Coastal
Area and River Basin Management (modified from Ritchie and James, 1997)
7